Abstract
This study assesses the viability and cost of using electric propulsion to transfer future global positioning system satellites from Shuttle parking orbits to mission orbits. Transportation-to-orbit life-cycle costs of a xenon-ion and ammonia arcjet propelled orbital transfer vehicle are compared to those of a conventional chemical upper stage. To insure a fair treatment of electric orbital transfer vehicle (EOTV) technology; worst-, median-, and best-case technology goals defining specific engineering and cost parameters were established. Use of the EOTV in lieu of a chemical upper stage potentially reduces the Space Shuttle cargo element mass by 45 to 73% and the transport-to-orbit life-cycle cost by 4 to 61%, or up to $21 million per flight, while still meeting a 90-day flight time requirement. This concept offers the potential to utilize the existing Space Shuttle fleet or expendable launch vehicles more efficiently. Heavier or higher altitude payloads can also be efficiently transported to their mission orbits by scaling up the EOTV size or accepting somewhat longer transfer times.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
